Dismissed

Prasanta Bhoi @ Mangua v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC13 Apr 2021ABLAPL/3091/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

dismissed a petitioner's application for pre-arrest bail against charges of kidnapping, abduction, rape, and related offences involving a child. The High Court held that the allegations are serious, incriminating materials exist, and the petitioner does not deserve release due to the heinous nature of the crimes and the circumstances of the case.

What did the court decide?

Application for pre-arrest bail dismissed.

Prasanta Bhoi @ Mangua Vs State of Odisha — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK

¶2

ABLAPL No.3091 of 2021

¶3

Prasanta Bhoi @ Mangua … Petitioner

¶4

-versus –

¶5

State of Odisha … Opp. Party

¶6

CORAM : HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE S. PUJAHARI

¶7

ORDER

¶8

13.04.2021

¶9

This matter is taken up through video conferencing

¶10

mode.

¶11

The petitioner apprehending his arrest in Gobindpur P.S. Case No.24 of 2021 corresponding to Special G.R. Case No.30 of 2021 pending in the court of ADJ-cum-Special POCSO, Cuttack for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 363/366/323/328/506/109/376(2)(n)/294 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act and Section 6 of the POCSO Act has filed this petition for his release on pre-arrest bail.

¶12

It is submitted that in the earlier case, the petitioner was also indicted in the kidnap of the victim at the instance of the mother of the petitioner but on the statement of the victim therein they were not proceeded with in the said case.

¶13

The prosecution allegation reveals that the petitioner along with his younger brother kidnapped the victim and thereafter they kept her at Bhubaneswar where brother of the petitioner stated to have made sexual assault on the victim. Thereafter the victim was taken to Fategarh in the district of Nayagarh where she was kept there. She was ravished by the

¶14

¶15

younger brother of the present petitioner and one Sankar Das stated to have assaulted and criminally intimated the victim at the instance of the present petitioner and his brother extended threat to her not to say anything before the police as well as the doctor for which in the earlier case, the victim did not depose anything in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C against them.

¶16

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that in the earlier case, the victim had not stated anything against the present petitioner and his younger brother and as such the case against them was closed but later on the present case has been raised with a concocted allegation. Therefore, the petitioner deserves to be released on pre-arrest bail.

¶17

The same is, however, vehemently opposed by the learned counsel for the State with the submission that the allegation is serious in nature and incriminating materials appearing against the petitioner showing his indictment in the aforesaid case. Therefore, he does not deserve to be released on pre-arrest bail.

¶18

On consideration of the facts and the submissions made, especially the nature and character of incriminating materials appearing against the petitioner, heinousness and seriousness of the offence alleged, circumstances in which he has been indicted in this case, coupled with the fact that the victim stated under what circumstances she could not make any independent statement before the Magistrate in the court in the earlier case, this Court is of the view that the prayer for

¶19

¶20

pre-arrest bail of the petitioner in this case on the ground stated by the counsel is devoid of merit and accordingly stands dismissed.

¶21

As the restrictions due to the COVID-19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a soft copy of this order available in the High Court’s website or print out thereof at par with certified copy in the manner prescribed, vide Court’s Notice No.4587, dated 25th March, 2020.

¶22

PKS

¶23

………. ………….. S.Pujahari, J.

Prasanta Bhoi @ Mangua v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prasanta Bhoi @ Mangua v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sushant Swain @ Susant Vs State of Odisha

Soumyaranjan Satapathy @ Lipun Vs State of Odisha

Arun Chandra Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Shyama Suna Vs State of Odisha

Manas Jena Vs State of Odisha

Bikram Roul Vs State of Odisha